Chamber and committees

As I said to the cabinet secretary just the other day, this is happening across western Europe—indeed, across the world—at this moment in time. It is not a Scotland-specific problem. What seems to be a Scotland-specific problem, though, is that for 15 years, this SNP and Green Government has not built enough affordable homes. That is a clear problem that we are seeing in Scotland today. Why is that?

I thank the minister for that answer and I respect what she has to say, but the Edinburgh tram inquiry has now been running for over eight years. To date, it has cost Scottish taxpayers £13.1 million, and the end is still not in sight. The cost of the inquiry now stands at more than the cost of the Iraq war investigation. The Inquiries Act 2005 obliges the chair to consider costs at all times if they are funded from the public purse. I ask the minister a very simple question: does she believe that the inquiry has been value for money?

International evidence demonstrates that, for many universities in different countries, such as Ireland, the introduction of rent controls has resulted in students being further away from being able to access private rented accommodation. Has the Government done any work to look at what impact rent controls will have in Scotland?

I can tell the cabinet secretary that what is worrying landlords, especially those in the social rented sector, is the bill. That sector is worried about where it will find the finance to take forward projects that are so vitally needed across our communities. The rent freezes that have been implemented have failed to make any difference. Instead, they have actually driven up rents for those who have tried to further their tenancies.

Conservative members remain concerned about the bill’s impact. We are concerned about the social rented sector and about students seeking private tenancies in their second year at university. Many universities have outlined concerns about students who come to cities across our country being unable to find accommodation; indeed, they are being told not to come. We are concerned about homeless people finding it even more difficult to find a home. We are concerned about the shattering of the confidence to invest that the bill is driving. We are concerned about the loss of vital homes to live in and we are concerned that the bill could trigger a greater housing crisis in Scotland than we have already seen.

The Scottish Conservatives will continue to hold the Government to account on the impact that the bill could have. Labour members have forced ministers to take this action, and they can congratulate themselves for that, but they, too, will be to blame if we see the sort of crisis that all the international evidence suggests rent controls deliver.

Given that the Labour Party has developed and pushed the policy, is the member able to say in what other part in the world such an approach has not been removed?

This might represent the most important part of my work this week, convener.

Amendment 39 moved—[Miles Briggs]—and agreed to.

It is my intention to press amendment 4 and to ask members to support Willie Rennie’s amendment 5. This is our one opportunity to remove the social rented sector from the bill, and members across the Parliament need to take it, because the damage that including that sector and its not seeing the future investment that is vitally needed for all our communities would cause is unacceptable. I hope that it will be removed.

I will also move amendment 23. However, given what the minister said about amendment 26, I am happy not to move that amendment and to have discussions before stage 3, tomorrow.

My amendment 77 looks to put in place a point at which the bill would expire. The First Minister has stated that such interventions in the housing market must be time limited. The bill is emergency legislation and it must have an end date. Therefore, we note that ministers are already signalling two potential extensions, which would mean that the bill would sit on the statute book for at least 18 months.

Examples from other countries, such as Sweden and Ireland, indicate that prolonged controls on rents can lead to significant housing shortages, which, in turn, hurt potential tenants and homeless people who are trying to access tenancies, especially private tenancies. Therefore, I hope that members will support amendment 77 to put in place an expiry date for the bill.

Amendment 4, in my name, would remove the social rented sector from the bill and exempt it from regulations. The social housing sector is already highly regulated and has taken important steps in keeping rent increases as low as possible. Furthermore, the Scottish Federation of Housing Associations has warned of unintended consequences from the bill for social housing and the development of affordable housing, as well as potential consequences for construction costs, which have increased, and for meeting net zero targets. We therefore ask members to support my amendment 4 and Willie Rennie’s amendment 5.

Amendment 23, in my name, looks towards mid-market rent properties, which are an affordable housing tenure that housing associations offer. They are homes that are for rent to households that are on low to middle incomes.

Rents for MMR homes are generally set lower than private rents but higher than housing association rents for social housing. The tenure is an important part of the housing mix to support those who may not be eligible for or who cannot access social rented homes but who struggle to afford higher rents in the private rented sector. The issue is that the tenancy type is a private residency, so it is the same as homes that are rented from private landlords. We therefore hope that members will support my amendment 23.

My amendment 26 relates to rent increase notices that are sent to tenants before the legislation expires. The bill states that any rent increase notice that is served while the rent cap is in force will have no effect. That means in effect that no rent increase notice can be served on any tenant prior to 1 April 2023, if we assume that the rent freeze expires the day before that, so the rent freeze would remain in place until the end of April—not the end of March, as ministers have outlined—given the requirement to give 28 days’ notice of any rent change in the social sector. We therefore believe that landlords should be able to provide such notices before 1 April.

I move amendment 4.

Convener, I think that that is maybe the wrong group.